I'm with Jason on this one.  I think asking people to change their file
names to ensure deploy order is ludicrous.  As I recall, the unix sysv
numbering is all on symlinks, not the scripts/whatever themselves.

david jencks

On 2002.03.14 18:18:46 -0500 Jason Dillon wrote:
> >
> >
> >deploy1/2/3 zero votes
> >000-999mywathever.xar:11 votes
> >deploy.order: 9 votes
> >
> >some just don't give a hoot
> >
> >ok the deploy.order was a good idea given by a sweedish guy sitting at
> the
> >back of the class, it goes like this, put a deploy.order that specifies
> the
> >order in which you deploy the files, it means that you put for example
> ><deploy-order>
> >the-first-file.xar
> >the-second-file.xar
> ></deploy-order>
> >
> 
> This is the same as explicitly listing your deployment urls... which if 
> you don't specify a file:// directory url the order is as you list it. 
>  It is only when listing from a directory which causes this 
> dependency/order problem.
> 
> >I kind of liked it, since it means you can put additional information,
> but
> >sacha pointed out you can also put a order.readme file and be done with
> >this, with the drawbacks that you could actually mess up the names
> easily
> >(bound to happen) and that you needed multiple deploy.order files to get
> at
> >the same result if you went for dynamic deployments.
> >
> >so the 000-999.xar idea is the one, if someone wants to do it go
> ahead....
> >
> 
> I still think this is a really bad idea.
> 
> We have a half functional dependency system... so rather than fix is, we 
> artificially force users to number there deployments, or staticly list 
> the urls to deploy.
> 
> How does that make the JBoss deployment system easy?  One of the big 
> features of JBoss is easy deployment... which this just basically tosses 
> out the window.  The instructions for deployment go from :
> 
> "copy to deploy/"
> 
> to
> 
> "copy to deploy/, make sure that the file name is prefixed with a number 
> such that it is larger than all dependency deployments and lower than 
> other deployments which depend on it.  If you are not sure what the 
> dependencys are then trial and error... or go look through each 
> deplopment descriptor and...".
> 
> Why not just put the simple sorting bits back in UDS until the 
> dependency issue can be resolved?
> 
> --jason
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Jboss-development mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to